Luxi Turna This review contains spoilers.Short version: Lame soft porn movie. But it'll leave you soft, it's not sexy enough to be porn and not interesting enough to be a movie.The premise: rich girl kidnapped, kept for a long time, and falls in love with her captors.The promise: An interesting film about political revolutionaries, sexual torture, and Stockholm syndrome. It was the patty hearst story, except there was no black guy and the the characters were one-dimensional (the uncaring evil rich father, the fanatic leader, etc).My rating: two tits downMy review: I cringe when I see how silly and jingoistic our politics was in the 70s and 80s. I also cringe when I see what passed for "racy" and "sexy" in movies back then. I imagine this would have gotten an X-rating, but today it would be "PG". We thought we were really hip and free then, but we were comparing ourselves to the psychotic repression of the 50s. What we SHOULD have done was public naked fcck parties, like kids do today.How could we possibly have missed doing that? All we had was co-ed dorms, and the boys lived on the other side of the building. We thought that was a sexual revolution? As to BDSM in this movie, TOTALLY forget it! She did get kidnapped (sexy) and she was even handcuffed (real sexy!) and kept in a box for a while--WAY sexy... in theory. But not in this movie. She never screamed once, though I was about to from boredom.Frankly, when it happened to me, I liked being stripped naked, tied to a bed, sexually tortured until I cried, and raped by strangers (somebody's friends who I knew wouldn't kill me); and that's what I wanted to see in this film. But there's no sexual, no torture, no crying, no rape and most of all, no naked. The closest it gets is two topless girls kissing in a bathtub. I sh1t you not, that's it.Now there WAS a promising scene where she's suspended upside down topless, but she has pants on and looks bored. And you can completely forget whips or spanking or anything else even semi-violent. Her hair never even got messed up! This thing would even have been LAME and BORING when it was made. The only agony pain in this movie was having to sit and watch it.Instead, google "bdsm video tube free" and download hours of REAL nubbin rubbin' fuel from free porn from any of the sites that have "tube" in their name. Then when you're good and horny (which this film won't make you), get picked up a stranger at a biker bar and tell him tyou'll make a deal with him: if he takes you home and ties you to his furniture, then he can do anything he wants to you. And smile innocently.It works every time. ;-)

John Seal A surprisingly svelte Oliver Reed stars in this bizarro, artsy thriller from cinema renaissance man Paul Mayersberg. Reed plays Gregory La Vey (any relation to Anton?), the moneyed father of poor little rich girl Rowena (Irina Brook, who is easy to look at but not so easy to believe as an actress). When Rowena wanders out onto the palatial grounds of her estate one misty moisty night, she's kidnapped by three villains who appear to be dressed for the village panto or university rag week. The threesome then subject Rowena to a series of 'ego-stripping' exercises, including sensory deprivation, exposure to white noise, and waterboarding. Forget the panto--this lot should be working for George Bush's Department of Justice! Pretty soon she does a Patty Hearst and starts taking naked baths with her captors. There are echoes here of the over-egged grandiosity of Merry Christmas Mr. Lawrence, which Mayersberg wrote for director Nagisa Oshima, including a morose Sinead O'Connor song in place of David Sylvian's Forbidden Colours, and a lot of operatic interludes. Captive lacks the powerhouse performances that made Mr. Lawrence a success, but it's still a unique, fascinating and occasionally disquieting viewing experience. There's also enough good photographic work here from DoP Mike Southon (Paperhouse, Ken Russell's Gothic) to justify a DVD release at some point.

missingchicagomarshall This film is a moderately chilling suspense film. It is also an apt illustration of the psychology behind kidnapping and yet the thing that sticks out for me still to this day is the haunting soundtrack.This was provided by U2's Dave Evans ( The Edge) and a brief appearance on one track by yet unknown in the states Sinead O'Conner. Very nice work by Evans at complimenting the various mood swings of a psychological thriller.The filmmaker takes time to carefully light this film and the music follows as a synchronized back-drop. In true minimalist fashion Evans accompanies moments of poignancy with stripped, warm guitar tones and builds tension with true late 80's keyboard and tribal drum infusion.U2 was still freshly blazing their trail across the American consciousness and this side-bar by the Edge was intriguingly welcomed by close fans. Much like Tangerine Dream's colorful sound-scape for Risky Business and the Chicago Loop's El trains, this soundtrack seems in touch with the over-all mood of the piece and not to personally connected to character. This is as it should be. The movie musical may devote a theme song to every character but the score, the sonic back-drop, should simply over- and under-shadow the flow of moments. The musician who scores a film has this concern, even to the point of deciding when not to include music at all. This soundtrack is available and worth revisiting.

nivek_nailgun A lot of people hated this movie but I guarantee it's got a fanbase out there, here's why: It's made for the Damsels in Distress fans. Those who are into bdsm and the like. For most of the movie it's got the kidnapee tied up and the abuse is related to various sexual themes. For fans of that genre only.